Hi, I use the 1000 version, but the 600, 800 and 1000 all have the same features. the main reason I use the 1000 is because it supports a 4Tb internal HD and it's silent. The 800 can also have an internal HD but is fan cooled. The 600 has no internal HD support so it relies on network connectivity.

I'm a big fan of this device, it's been performing great for over a year and has frequent updates.

The other day I dusted off my Pioneer BDP-05FD BD player from 2008 to see if it still works, Pioneer had a recent 2013 firmware update. I can't imagine going back to swapping BD's, I move around my content too often.

@ john2910 - these projectors are pretty much gone from the market, they show up occasionally on ebay. There's no way I'm selling mine until something remarkable is released that can exceed it's 3D capabilities at this price point.

For the past 3 yrs I have had the PJ set on a coffee table in my finished attic. No complaints.

But we just moved.

I am going to put the PJ on the top shelf in a closet centered at the rear of my new bonus room where I am setting up my theater. It is level with the top 2/3 of the screen, not quite level with the top of screen.

QUESTION:
Will this level work? Will I need to turn the PJ upside down as I believe ceiling installs are done?

For the past 3 yrs I have had the PJ set on a coffee table in my finished attic. No complaints.

But we just moved.

I am going to put the PJ on the top shelf in a closet centered at the rear of my new bonus room where I am setting up my theater. It is level with the top 2/3 of the screen, not quite level with the top of screen.

QUESTION:
Will this level work? Will I need to turn the PJ upside down as I believe ceiling installs are done?

thanks in advance!
Kevin

Check the users manual but I think you should be fine. This projector is designed to be centered as you had it and does have reasonable lense shift. It is when it is above the screen you are in trouble. If you are 2/3 up you should have no problem.
Set it up now centered at your distance on a temp support. Then move the shift down to see how much range you have just to make sure.

Hello there i used to had a Mitsubishi 7800D,
Does this sharp have far better blacks?

I didnt like the blacks on the Mitsubishi 7800D..

Best regards

I don't know about the Mits 7800 but the Sharp does have better blacks than the Mits 7900; however, in 3D mode it's pretty much a wash. The Mits 8000 has an extra iris and has pretty good blacks for a DLP. All three of these projectors produce excellent 3D with the Mits 8000 having the best 3D I've seen to date when set up properly on an HP screen and using the right source material.

Check the users manual but I think you should be fine. This projector is designed to be centered as you had it and does have reasonable lense shift. It is when it is above the screen you are in trouble. If you are 2/3 up you should have no problem.
Set it up now centered at your distance on a temp support. Then move the shift down to see how much range you have just to make sure.

thanks Doug!

Got the HDMI and 3D wire installed to the closet last night, will get power from a new breaker routed to it today and then test.

Also, I'm going from a distance of ~13' to about 16.5' from PJ to screen at this house. Anyone tell me how much bigger I can up-size from my current 108" 16x9 screen?

I don't know about the Mits 7800 but the Sharp does have better blacks than the Mits 7900; however, in 3D mode it's pretty much a wash. The Mits 8000 has an extra iris and has pretty good blacks for a DLP. All three of these projectors produce excellent 3D with the Mits 8000 having the best 3D I've seen to date when set up properly on an HP screen and using the right source material.

Thx for you reply,

And do the blacks from the sharp come close to my Sony hw55es?

Will it be an huge step back if i go from the sony to the sharp in 2d material?

In low -> very low APL scenes, the HW55 will have an advantage, in mixed contrast scenes, the 30K will have an advantage. Calibrated light output is similar, the 30K can handle over 900+ lumens @ D65.

you can turn on both iris and the contrast in 2D is quite good for a DLP in this price range.

if contrast in 2D is that important, consider running a 2 projector setup. A JVC RS46/X35 for 2D and the 30K for 3D is going to hold most folks over for quite a while. The low end JVC is without a doubt better than anything the 2K Sony's can handle in low APL scenes.

The major strength of the 30K is the 3D with rock solid performance and no chance of x-talk or flicker. It's naturally sharp as well. I don't like the reality creation on the HW50/55 in 3D. too many artifacts that stand out in stereo viewing.

In low -> very low APL scenes, the HW55 will have an advantage, in mixed contrast scenes, the 30K will have an advantage. Calibrated light output is similar, the 30K can handle over 900+ lumens @ D65.

you can turn on both iris and the contrast in 2D is quite good for a DLP in this price range.

if contrast in 2D is that important, consider running a 2 projector setup. A JVC RS46/X35 for 2D and the 30K for 3D is going to hold most folks over for quite a while. The low end JVC is without a doubt better than anything the 2K Sony's can handle in low APL scenes.

The major strength of the 30K is the 3D with rock solid performance and no chance of x-talk or flicker. It's naturally sharp as well. I don't like the reality creation on the HW50/55 in 3D. too many artifacts that stand out in stereo viewing.

Thx for your reply,

I thought that the light output was much stronger in 2d and 3d for de sony hw55es?
Its a hard descision to leave my hw55 but i cant get to see the sharp here to do a comparison..

What don't you like about the HW55 that you are looking to exchange it for a different model?

in 2D, calibrated, they are basically the same in high lamp, ~ 900 lumens, sharp has a slight edge. in 3D, Sony measures ~200 lumens higher but once you adjust the glasses brightness to handle the x-talk better, it's basically the same perceived brightness with the glasses on.

if the worry about contrast is a concern, maybe it's best to wait and see if something else comes out in the fall. although I don't expect any major breakthroughs in 3D performance from the DLP co's in this price range.

What don't you like about the HW55 that you are looking to exchange it for a different model?

in 2D, calibrated, they are basically the same in high lamp, ~ 900 lumens, sharp has a slight edge. in 3D, Sony measures ~200 lumens higher but once you adjust the glasses brightness to handle the x-talk better, it's basically the same perceived brightness with the glasses on.

if the worry about contrast is a concern, maybe it's best to wait and see if something else comes out in the fall. although I don't expect any major breakthroughs in 3D performance from the DLP co's in this price range.

The only thing that i dont like is the ghosting sometimes in3d,
But a dual setup is out of my budget..

If i only knew how the blacks look on the sharp that would make it easier..

I also had the epson 5010 and the hc7800,

with the hc7800 i didnt like the black floor so i hope its better on the sharp in 2d..

it's better but can't expect a day / night difference. I have no problem with the contrast in 3D on the 30K for most movies. On occasion there is a very dark 3D movie and I think it would be better on the JVC or the Sony 1100.

I think you should consider keeping the Sony for now. I have several 3D projectors but this is still one of my favorites.

it's better but can't expect a day / night difference. I have no problem with the contrast in 3D on the 30K for most movies. On occasion there is a very dark 3D movie and I think it would be better on the JVC or the Sony 1100.

I think you should consider keeping the Sony for now. I have several 3D projectors but this is still one of my favorites.

Do you have some examples of the blackfloor on the sharp?(i know its hard to capture that on camera).
If its close to the epson 5020 than i can live with that..

The DI digs down pretty deep. It's been a while since I've seen an Epson with it's DI enabled. The only thing that bothered me with the Z30K's DI is that I think it digs too deep for how much native contrast it has available. What I mean by that is you get clipped whites far too often. It was one of the reasons I decided to sell the Z30K. Otherwise I would have loved to keep it for a "3D only" projector. The image, even when viewed behind the glasses, can look "cooked" during darker scenes because of how far down the DI digs. Dynamic gamma has to compensate for this and the result is very noticeable clipped whites. I can't remember if Epson's DI does the same thing or not, like I said, it's been a while since I've seen one.

I don't think the Epson DI is aggressive enough. I've had a number of 5020/5030's here and wonder if the DI is actually functioning at times.

The 30K 3D performance is still difficult to beat. I've watched a ton of tough 3D content on it, I don't see any obvious clipping issues in 3D, at least not on my copy. I don't know if they had any software changes during the production run.

I just watched Tarzan 3D the other day, it reminds me of Sammy's adventure, extreme parallax which can be x-talk city on non DLP's.

Watch the opening space scene of Star Wars Episode III on the Z30K and then watch it on a 2014 JVC or Sony. It's a scene like this that makes you appreciate a well implemented DI. I must be particularly sensitive to it's workings. At first I thought it's performance was almost as good as the PD8150 and then after I spent more time with it I witnessed many shortcomings. I just have no sympathy for DLP projectors that have bad DI performance (not that this implementation is bad). Native contrast performance of all but a handful of DLP units is not good enough by today's standards. To stay competitive to the competition today, DLP projectors NEED to have a well implemented DI otherwise I might as well buy a business projector. After seeing some of the other implementations I just don't classify this as "top shelf" performance. It is drastically better than many other implementations I've seen before though. It's about 75% of the way there to something from Sony, JVC, Runco, and Sim2.

Another scene to look at is on Harry Potter 7 Part 2. The scene where Harry is confronted by Draco and his gang in the Room of Requirement. Draco's hair is TOTALLY lost to clipping. This doesn't happen on the PD8150, Q750i, or LS-100D (all DLP projectors). It's quite noticeable when watching. Something obvious to the eye when watching and not something you have to go looking for.

remember the context of this model.. $1799 fire sale model with great 3D performance and best in class 3D glasses. it's contrast performance is better than the BQ 1070 and the current BQ 7000/7500 models. better placement flexibility than the Mitsubishi DLP models, etc. no chance of x-talk or flicker for those who notice this, and I am definitely one of those people.

Watching 3D on the current JVC's still gives me a headache after a while, I'm just too sensitive to the flicker. The contrast does look great so I hope this gets changed somewhere down the road w/ faster panels.

Harry Potter I'm watching on the VW1100 since the 3D performance is something in between the JVC and 30K. Better x-talk performance than the JVC and less flicker but better contrast than the Sharp.

I guess. The context is only relevant because on that one sale. It was MSRP'd to sell in the same league as the JVC's and 1080p Sony models. That's why we get a decent lens that's motorized, a DI, and 3D. If we were to judge this model based on that original price I think you'd be less than impressed. But then again, I think this is why we saw the huge price drop. The performance for a DLP unit just wasn't there to compete with those LCoS models. The $1799 price was a bargain and probably the best under $2000 projector out there for 2D and 3D performance. A lot of people bought this unit for more than $1799 after that sale went dry. I saw a lot of them sell between $2000-$3000.

Also, you don't need to watch the HP 7 scene in 3D. The same thing happens when watching in 2D. There were a lot of times a scene like the HP 7 scene took place and easily noticeable clipping happened. Like I said, I would have been happier if they toned the DI back a bit more so this didn't happen. It's black level for a DLP unit would have still been more than adequate for most, including me. I don't expect the world from DLP when it comes to contrast. I think because I've seen so many other projectors, my view on DI performance is a little harsh. I see a good implementation and I think to myself "why can't this one be like that? Does it really cost that much to implement one well?" I have too many first world problems....

"This is the first DLP projector I've owned, other than the PD8150, that has had a DI that I would say meets my qualifications for great DI performance. "

It's a breath of fresh air when it comes to cheaper .65" DMD DLP projectors. It's overall performance is big step up from every other .65" DMD DLP projector that I've owned, due in part to it's fantastic DI that offers amazing contrast performance (for DLP). Combine that with fully motorized optics, lens memory, tons of features within the menu I didn't even cover and it makes this projector that much better compared to it's cheaper DLP brethren

Not much has changed. I still think this is without doubt the best single chip .65" DLP projector out there. And it's DI is loads better than most projectors with them. I just don't think it's as good as something from Sony, JVC, Runco, or Sim2 for DI performance. Like I said, it's about 75% of the way there and this was after spending a couple months with the projector. That quote was after about 8 hours of use. It's not just "torture" scenes where the DI is worse than the ones listed above. There were mid-apl level scenes that tripped it up that I never saw happen on other DLP projectors or even the Sony or JVC. It just seems to be missing the "know-how" that Sony, Runco and others have infused into the algorithms. If Sharp could have done some fine tuning and release a firmware update or something I think it could have gotten all the way there. The DI was the only reason I sold it. I would have kept it for 3D because it had great contrast for a 3D unit, I just couldn't stand the clipped whites in darker movies. Right now I'd rather deal with rare ghosting events on the JVC and get all the other benefits it offers like top shelf contrast in 3D, slightly brighter 3D, and frame interpolation in 3D. I just think for me at least the 3D experience is better this way. Rare ghosting is less noticeable than clipped whites.

Btw, this was one of my complaints about the PD8150 too, but it happened far less on that projector. It was a rare occurrence on the PD8150. It simply has the better implementation and "knows" better how to avoid clipping artifacts.

for me, the JVC flicker never goes away. which is a shame because they did a decent job controlling the x-talk and added the CMD. I hope they can change this in the future.

I started watching 3D in 2010 with the Acer 5360 and the 3D was impressive for a cheap $500 projector. When I first got my RS40 I thought something was wrong. The flicker was very noticeable in comparison to the DLP. That hasn't really changed in the last 4 years although the CMD seems to take the edge off a bit.

for flicker from worst to best: JVC->Sony->Epson-> any DLP.

this comparison I did a while back exaggerates the situation but it's not hard to see the major advantage the DLP's have, they are rock solid in 3D. Add in a decent speed color wheel and I can watch 3D for hours without fatigue. this is more important to me than some blooming once in a blue moon.